A Prime Election Issue in San Francisco Is a Proposed Ban on High Rise Buildings

SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 31— Although the race for mayor has attracted more attention, a proposition that would vir tually end all high‐rise build ing in San Francisco has be come a prime issue in Tues day's municipal election.

The proposition has triggered a bitter fight, largely pitting those who call themselves urban conservationists against big business and the construction industry.

So controversial is the prop osition, that with the cam paign now in its final days both sides agree that the issue is still in doubt.

However, both sides held polls showing that they were out in front. Supporters of the height limit predicted that they would get at least 55 per cent of the vote. And on the other side, opponents of the initia tive said that their polls showed the proposition would be defeated.

The basic issue behind the proposition is what people here call the “Manhattanization” of San Francisco. They point out that in the last five years, 21 new high‐rise office buildings were built in the downtown area, vastly altering the city's skyline.

It was as a result of this construction boom that the high‐rise revolt began. “Do we want to become another Man hattan?” opponents of the sky scrapers asked. From the start, the opposition was led by Alvin Duskin, a dress manufacturer.

Once the opponents of high rise building had marshaled their forces, they persuaded the, city's Board of Supervisors late last year to halt the United States Steel Corporation from building a 40‐story, 550‐ foot tower on the city's water front.

After that, petitions were cir culated to have a proposition put on the ballot that would prevent construction of any building in the city more than six stories —or 72 feet—high unless specific approval was given by the voters.

Mr. Duskin's petitions were successful.

The vote here Tuesday will mark the first time that voters of a major American city have. attempted to halt the construc tion of skyscrapers.

But San Franciscans have history of firsts. It was here, just over a decade ago, that voters rebelled against freeway construction. And on that oc casion, too, they were suc cessful.

The battle against high‐rise buildings was stepped up yes terday when both sides were compelled to disclose their fi nancial backers.

A new controversy erupted when it was found that the ‐largest contributors in the fight against the proposition included two major utilities— the Pacific Telephone Company ‐and the Pacific Gas and Elec tric Company.

Both were listed as having contributed $10,000. Similar $10,000 contributions to defeat the proposition were made by the Standard Oil Company, the Bank of America and Milton Meyer & Co., a San Francisco based real estate firm.

Immediately after the dis closures were made, Mr. Dus kin announced that lawsuits would be filed against the util ities. He said that it would be a class action “on behalf of all the people who pay gas and phone bills which may be in creased as a result of the utili ties' involving themselves in local political campaigning.” ‐The proposition faces wide opposition. Both of the city's .newspapers have urged a “no” vote as have the Chamber of Commerce and Mayor Joseph L. Alioto. The newspapers called the proposition “mis taken and highly dangerous” and said that its passage would result in increased taxes.

Mayor Alioto, in speaking out against the proposition, argued that “everything over r.six stories is not ugly or evil, and every two‐story building is not beautiful.”

Mrs. Dianne Feinstein, the president of the Board of Su pervisors and a candidate for Mayor, said that she, too, was against the proposition but was opposed to Manhattanization of San Francisco by high‐rise ‐.developers.”

She said that she did not agree with details of the pro posal, particularly the arbitrary height limit that it sets.

Harold Dobbs, another may oralty candidate, said that he, too, was opposed to the propo sition. “I applaud the senti ment behind it,” he said, “but deplore the unworkable me chanics it contains.”

Supporters of the proposi tion argue that such construc tion not only destroys the char acter of the city but also con tributes to pollution and costs more in services than it pro dUces in taxes.

Mr. Duskin and his support ers detailed their arguments in a 256‐page book, “The Ultimate High Rise,” which was pub lished last week. The book was produced by The Bay Guardian, a local newspaper.

We are continually improving the quality of our text archives. Please send feedback, error reports,
and suggestions to archive_feedback@nytimes.com.

A version of this archives appears in print on November 1, 1971, on Page 48 of the New York edition with the headline: A Prime Election Issue in San Francisco Is a Proposed Ban on High Rise Buildings. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe